Should a pistol be aimed or pointed?

[OldMarksman]

After years of shooting at paper targets at varying distances, I signed up for a defensive pistol shoting course put on in St. Louis by the Texas Defensive Shooting folks.

They were in town for some time to train local police forces.

Two or more instructors per student, rotating among students.

The drill was a modified El Presidente exercise--shooting at three metal plates at seven yards.

We started by shooting one paper target. And then it was all about sound.

They recorded the number of hits and the time required, time after time after time.

Most students improved by over 30% in time and 30% in hits in the course of firing about 1,200 rounds.

I was amazed with the rapidity of fire for which they strove, and by how unprepared I was for that at the beginning, even with long years of handgun experience.

I left thinking that I had learned a lot about defensive shooing.

Wrong. What I learned was how to shoot rapidly with control.

But from that standpoint, it was very worth while.

When I took the I.C.E. course some time later, we fired at paper. The training was designed to build upon skills in a layered manner.

At the outset, the instructor looked at the targets. "You are shooting too fast", or "you are shooting too slowly"--that based on groups, and aimed at teaching how to achieve the right balance of speed and precision.

There's nothing wrong with shooing ten shots in ten seconds, but consider this: a defender may have two seconds available, and it may take several shots to hit anything vital inside the assailant's body.

One way or the other, it is important to acquire the skills for much more rapid continued fire.

Watch videos of the current FBI training drills to get an idea of what it involves. Or watch Mike Seeklander on some episodes of The Best Defense.

 

[Kevin Rohrer]

Under 30-feet, I point and hit. Over that, I aim and (hopefully) hit.

 

[FITASC]

Quote:
A good skeet or trap shooter does not aim,
They absolutely DO aim!!! That's what the bead is for.

Absolutely FALSE. Any clay target shooter who is successful has both eyes on the target-the best remove the beads entirely. Aiming a shotgun at a moving target is the best way to miss behind every single time.
Aiming a pistol at a static paper target is one thing; trying to aim at something moving and bobbing is entirely different, your focus needs to be on the target with your sight in your peripheral vision - you're not Bullseye shooting here.

 

[WVsig]

After years of shooting at paper targets at varying distances, I signed up for a defensive pistol shoting course put on in St. Louis by the Texas Defensive Shooting folks.

They were in town for some time to train local police forces.

Two or more instructors per student, rotating among students.

The drill was a modified El Presidente exercise--shooting at three metal plates at seven yards.

We started by shooting one paper target. And then it was all about sound.

They recorded the number of hits and the time required, time after time after time.

Most students improved by over 30% in time and 30% in hits in the course of firing about 1,200 rounds.

I was amazed with the rapidity of fire for which they strove, and by how unprepared I was for that at the beginning, even with long years of handgun experience.

I left thinking that I had learned a lot about defensive shooing.

Wrong. What I learned was how to shoot rapidly with control.

But from that standpoint, it was very worth while.

When I took the I.C.E. course some time later, we fired at paper. The training was designed to build upon skills in a layered manner.

At the outset, the instructor looked at the targets. "You are shooting too fast", or "you are shooting too slowly"--that based on groups, and aimed at teaching how to achieve the right balance of speed and precision.

There's nothing wrong with shooing ten shots in ten seconds, but consider this: a defender may have two seconds available, and it may take several shots to hit anything vital inside the assailant's body.

One way or the other, it is important to acquire the skills for much more rapid continued fire.

Watch videos of the current FBI training drills to get an idea of what it involves. Or watch Mike Seeklander on some episodes of The Best Defense.

The Test is a training tool. Nothing more nothing less. Drills like The Test are a good gauge to see where you are. The avg shooter even on this forum is like the OP. They are not sure where they are and where they need to be. They are looking for ways to improve not to listen to stories about my training or your training experience. The Test is a very good gauge of your trigger control at speed and at the same time provides a training tool that can be used at almost all ranges. Many ranges are like the OPs that restrict things like drawing from the holster or shooting at multiple targets. That IMHO is what makes this drill so useful and effective.

If run it and you are all over the target under the 10 seconds then it tells you that you lack trigger control at the speed you are shooting. You need to work on trigger control before you go faster. You need to slow down and shoot a clean target.

If you can shoot a clean passing target but it takes you longer than 10 seconds it tells you that you have decent trigger control at a slower speed. You now need to learn to do the same thing faster. You need to learn to run the gun faster. Maybe stop aiming so much.

If you can shoot a clean target in 10 seconds then you work to shoot it in 9. Then 8. I watched an amazing shooter in my training course shoot it in sub 7 all in the black with a score of 98. He dropped 2 shots into the 9 ring in the black.

No one said that you could not shoot The Test faster than 10 seconds. Larry Vickers and KH just set the bar where they did because in their experience if you can shoot the test and pass you have mastered enough trigger control at speed to to deliver defensive handgun accuracy. Ernest Langdon likes the drill as well. He has a video where he shoots if from the draw in 7 and change.

Where at any point did anyone say that 10 shots in 10 seconds was simulation a gun fight? Your need to be correct and correct others is unnecessary in this instance. I was simply offering up a training tool that could help the OP. You clearly missed that point and needed to prove once again that you are "right" which again is why I avoid this part of the forum because its devolves into a pissing contest.

 

[Pep in CA]

WVsig, I'm almost sorry to have lured you into this thread. So much nitpicking and self-promoting point scoring involved. On the other hand, you've been the most helpful to me so far. So thanks.

And to answer your question about my range's rules, they allow 1 second intervals between shots and double taps. Anything faster is considered rapid fire and not allowed. So the Test drill that you suggested is within the bounds of the range rules and I will consider it for my training going forward.

Cheers.

 

[Pep in CA]

Absolutely FALSE. Any clay target shooter who is successful has both eyes on the target-the best remove the beads entirely. Aiming a shotgun at a moving target is the best way to miss behind every single time.
Aiming a pistol at a static paper target is one thing; trying to aim at something moving and bobbing is entirely different, your focus needs to be on the target with your sight in your peripheral vision - you're not Bullseye shooting here.

Bravo. I agree.

 

[Rangerrich99]

In the last three years I've taken about three dozen defensive handgun classes, and practiced dry-firing at home I don't know how many tens of thousands of reps, but I'm not an expert at anything in the realm of handguns. I'm just another average guy that's trying to find ways to get more proficient with his sidearm, so take this with a grain of salt.

IMHO, it's both. With the proficiency that I've reached since I really started trying to become a better trained defensive handgunner, I find that to a certain extent I'm aiming (looking for and consciously using the front sight) but I'm also simply pointing.

I don't know if I can explain this in a way that will make sense to anyone, but here goes.

During a drill/exercise whether I'm coming out of the holster or just pointing in from low-ready, what I'm looking for is the front sight to come up into my field of view. What I'm looking at is the portion of the target that I want to drive bullets into. Once the front sight rises up into that target zone that I'm focused on, I press the trigger.

I do not look for the front sight, and I don't try to focus on the front sight. It appears at the bottom of my field of view, and my hands automatically matriculate it towards the area that I was looking at. When it gets close enough, bang. I'm not looking for a perfect sight picture, or even a stable sight picture. I'm just looking for the front sight to get near what I want to hit.

The caveat here is that I've reached that competence level where I have a lot of confidence that the bullet will strike within two or three inches of the point on the target that I'm looking at.

Actually there's a second caveat: for me at my current level of ability, this works pretty well inside ten yards. At 15 yards I have to actually focus on the front sight to get hits close to where I want them. In other words, beyond 10 yards, I'm aiming.

Inside ten yards, I'm kind of doing a combination of both.

Here's a kind of example of what I'm trying to say. In this first video from about three years ago, I'm aiming each shot, hence the hesitations between shots:

https://youtu.be/S0_3EXHxgqY

In this second video from about 18 months ago, I'm pointing/aiming, allowing me to shoot faster but with nearly the same accuracy.

https://youtu.be/_5LxgTksxEk

In the second half of this video I'm just pointing for all three shots:
https://www.facebook.com/richard.kim.3979489/videos/10214782379810258/

These days I can go a bit faster than the second video pretty much every time, but it didn't come all at once or even in a graduated manner. It was more hit a little plateau here, then gain a bit a few weeks/months later, somehow mess things up for a while, then gain some ground , and so on. it's only in the last few months that I realized that I'm not really looking AT the front sight anymore. Rather, I'm looking at a specific point on the target and the front sight comes to meet it. Hopefully.

Hopefully some of that made sense.

 

[OldMarksman]

And to answer your question about my range's rules, they allow 1 second intervals between shots and double taps. Anything faster is considered rapid fire and not allowed.

That is true in several of the ranges around here.

In others there is no limitation on rapidity of fire.

But even in those, movement and drawing from a holster are not possible.

My gun club allowed fast draw, movement, and rapid fire, but physical limitations have forced me to drop the membership.

What might you do? That has already been suggested.

Look into IDPA competition somewhere that is acceptable to you.

There are numerous reasons why that does not constitute defensive training per se, but it will allow you to participate in rapid fire, shooting at multiple targets, and movement.

 

[raimius]

It depends on the level of speed and accuracy required for the shot.
At extreme close range, with a relatively large target, faster hits can be obtained with point shooting. As ranges increase or the desired target gets smaller, aiming becomes more effective.

For example, on an IPSC target at 3 yards or less, point shooting is generally faster and accurate enough. For the same target at 7 yards or more, point shooting is generally not effective to get A zone hits.

 

[WVsig]

It depends on the level of speed and accuracy required for the shot.
At extreme close range, with a relatively large target, faster hits can be obtained with point shooting. As ranges increase or the desired target gets smaller, aiming becomes more effective.

For example, on an IPSC target at 3 yards or less, point shooting is generally faster and accurate enough. For the same target at 7 yards or more, point shooting is generally not effective to get A zone hits.

Refresh my memory how large is the IPSC A zone?

 

[44 AMP]

Aiming a shotgun at a moving target is the best way to miss behind every single time.

I agree. one doesn't aim at the moving target, one aims where the target will be when the shot gets there.

Aiming a pistol at a static paper target is one thing; trying to aim at something moving and bobbing is entirely different, your focus needs to be on the target with your sight in your peripheral vision

Again, I agree.

- you're not Bullseye shooting here.

no, its not, but its still aiming. Its done differently, but its still aiming.

 

[Jim Watson]

I find that if you shoot a bit, you can train in the necessary precision of aim. Working inward, you can go from front sight centered in rear to "shotgunning" over the front, to indexing down the top of the gun, to the gun just in the field of view, down to "retention". It used to be common for gunzine writers to set specified range gates for each level of precision, I know Bill Jordan did. But I think it is an individual thing to be learned. Being that I am The Worst Shot On The Internet ©, I have to transition to more precise aim at closer range than the Cool Guys, but the continuum is there.

 

[Black Wolf]

I don't agree. Its one of the oldest and biggest lies about shotguns, that they aren't aimed, just pointed, in order to hit the target.

If you don't aim, you won't hit your target.


They absolutely DO aim!!! That's what the bead is for.

The difficulty in discussing the matter, and where people who aren't shooters get mislead, is that the aiming of a shotgun doesn't use the same kind of sights as rifles and pistols. It's still aiming,

Yes, it seems like nothing more than pointing, but think about it, it IS aiming.

Trouble is, many people hear "pointing" and think they can disregard aiming.

Maybe you define it differently, but for me, when you sight down the barrel, whether there is a bead, a front & rear sight, or no sight but the plane of the barrel, its aiming. What varies is the degree of difficulty, speed, and precision but its all aiming.

Pointing is what you do when you can't see the barrel, such as shooting a handgun from the hip.

Of course, there are experts who use the term "pointing" to mean anytime one is not fully and properly utilizing the sights. So it can be rather confusing.

As others have mentioned, the majority of people who have been in gunfights, and got hits, say they "saw" the front sight, and used it to aim with. Not the careful, precise lining up of front sight, rear sight and target, just a "flash picture" of the front sight on their target, and firing.

this is something that can be tested with a simple laser pointer (or a laser boresight, etc.) Fasten a laser pointer so its in line with the barrel. EMPTY GUN!!! EMPTY GUN!!! and, did I mention EMPTY GUN!!!?...

use a sheet of paper on the wall as your target. Present (point) the gun at the target, (laser off) without looking at the sights at all. Look only at the target. point your gun, then "freeze" in place (this is the toughest part, keeping the gun where you pointed it) then turn on the laser and see where the dot is, compared to your target.

Do this a few times. Then do the same thing, but look at the front sight when you aim. When your front sight is on that target, look where the laser dot is, its also on the target.

My 'point" here is that if you can see the muzzle (front sight or bead) you ARE aiming (whether you realize it, or not). If you can't, you are pointing.

Pointing can get hits at very close range. Aiming, even a "flash" aim gets more & better hits than pointing.

I'm sure others will disagree with my use of terms, but that's the way I see it.

Thank you!

This is exactly where I'm at - can you see the sights, at all? You are aiming! I definitely aim a shotty. I do not aim a single action revolver.

The whole "aim or point?" question (when discussing firing that involves use of the sights) sounds like the old "Do you love me or are you IN love with me?" to which the obvious answer is "shut up an go make me a sandwich"

As far as how much time and effort I devote to "aiming" well that depends on how far away the target is and how quickly I really need to get the shot off. Last range trip, I was doing Mozambique Drills, at 5 yd. I barely allowed the top strap to come into view. As soon as I could see some dots and a strip of steel that looked somewhat in line, I was lettin 'em loose. To me, it ain't so much about how you're doing it (I know some basic fundamentals need to be followed) but rather how MUCH you're doing it. Repetition, burn copious amounts of powder

 

[WVsig]

Thank you!

This is exactly where I'm at - can you see the sights, at all? You are aiming! I definitely aim a shotty. I do not aim a single action revolver.

The whole "aim or point?" question (when discussing firing that involves use of the sights) sounds like the old "Do you love me or are you IN love with me?" to which the obvious answer is "shut up an go make me a sandwich"

As far as how much time and effort I devote to "aiming" well that depends on how far away the target is and how quickly I really need to get the shot off. Last range trip, I was doing Mozambique Drills, at 5 yd. I barely allowed the top strap to come into view. As soon as I could see some dots and a strip of steel that looked somewhat in line, I was lettin 'em loose. To me, it ain't so much about how you're doing it (I know some basic fundamentals need to be followed) but rather how MUCH you're doing it. Repetition, burn copious amounts of powder

I could not disagree more. It is not how many rounds you send down range it is the quality of the rounds sent down range. Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect. You are much better shooting 100 rounds and making every round count then going to the range and sending 500 rounds down range without regard for fundamentals. This is especially true the early you are in the learning curve.

It would be my contention that a lot of the most important parts about shooting a pistol well can be learned and practiced without sending any rounds down range. Your grip, stance, draw and most importantly your trigger control all can be worked on and improved without shooting a round.

Live fire is very important and needs to be done but it should IMHO be done with more than " some basic fundamentals". Make every round count.

 

[Lohman446]

To further the thought above about the quality of practice:

“You can practice shooting eight hours a day, but if your technique is wrong, then all you become is very good at shooting the wrong way. Get the fundamentals down and the level of everything you do will rise.”

This was said by Michael Jordan. He was not talking about firearms but the lesson is correct still. I have heard it phrased "Practice does NOT make perfect, only perfect practice makes perfect"

 

[Black Wolf]

I could not disagree more. It is not how many rounds you send down range it is the quality of the rounds sent down range. Practice does not make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect. You are much better shooting 100 rounds and making every round count then going to the range and sending 500 rounds down range without regard for fundamentals. This is especially true the early you are in the learning curve.

It would be my contention that a lot of the most important parts about shooting a pistol well can be learned and practiced without sending any rounds down range. Your grip, stance, draw and most importantly your trigger control all can be worked on and improved without shooting a round.

Live fire is very important and needs to be done but it should IMHO be done with more than " some basic fundamentals". Make every round count.

I understand your position, and respect it, but still disagree.

The thing is, tho - I can not say with 100% certainty because I actually have had considerable training. So... was it the quality training or the truck load of lead I chucked that got me dialed in? Truth is, I can't say without going back in time and do it each way.

However, I honestly feel that it was "doing it" that made me proficient, not being taught it. I guess I shouldn't assume everyone learns the same way.

I don't under estimate the value of dry practice. I actually do a lot of it. But it is like martial arts - bag work is important, kata is important, partner drills are important, but if you're learn to fight..... ya gotta fight.

 

[Black Wolf]

To further the thought above about the quality of practice:



This was said by Michael Jordan. He was not talking about firearms but the lesson is correct still. I have heard it phrased "Practice does NOT make perfect, only perfect practice makes perfect"

but the proof is on the paper. If you're learning to shoot "the wrong way" but are quickly placing accurate shots, what's the problem?

 

[Lohman446]

but the proof is on the paper. If you're learning to shoot "the wrong way" but are quickly placing accurate shots, what's the problem?

Those are vague terms. If you can be more accurate and faster by practicing the right fundamentals (whatever those may be) wouldn't that be better?

I get that there is no certain "right way" that we are discussing and that presents an issue.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I am not talking about just hitting a 20" x 40" target I am talking about A zone hits. I am not talking single hole groups like one can shoot slow firing but all in the area the size of a grapefruit. I imagine you knew that and I imagine you can do it.

Well, the initial location of the grapefruit varies on IDPA/IPSC targets; but I do fire a tighter group in rapid fire than slow fire usually. In force-on-force, the target starts moving as soon as it perceives you and that tends to scatter the hit locations in a surprising way, especially when they turn.

 

[Don Fischer]

For me, the thing about pointing and aiming is that pointing is much faster nd if the target is far enough away to give you time to aim, it's probably not a threat in the first place. I don't practice handgun shooting but maybe once a month. Pain in the butt looking for all the fired case's and seem's I never recover them all. Much rather fire my revolver's at longer range and have time to aim. Tried aiming at target's about 10 yds away and a snail can darn near cover that distance before you can get off an aimed shot. If you were in a war and under attack by the enemy, I'm pretty sure if you aim your shots, your gonna die at the hands of some guy that simply sprays the area. So I got away from aiming at all with a carry gun and I do point it, With my eyes I simply have a hard time even finding the post! When I do practice I don't attempt to ht a specific spot but rather an area, center mass! If shooting is warranted I doubt the target will be that far off. If the target is, you could probably walk away!

I,m pretty sure experienced pistol competitor's can do what the rest of us would call amazing things, most of us do not fall into that cataglory.